[time-nuts] LORAN C simulator operational

[paul swed]

Back from a trip and have had a chance to clean up the software for the
LORAN C simulator.
So do people generally just attach that to this thread. Say a schematic and
basic program. Then thats it???
The simulators very stable and at this point the Austron 2100F goes from
acquire to track in about 2 minutes.
With the first readout at 1.1 e-11 between the two references that I am
using. I am using a gri of 60000 though others can be used. Signal level 48
which is quite strong.
By the way schematic wise I suspect final output a gif. Any particular free
schematic software people use.
I am comfortable with visio so may just use that.
Reagrds

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:48 PM, paul swed <paulswedb at gmail.com> wrote:

> A few weeks back I started a discussion on the demise of LORAN C. It was
> quite a long discussion and spawned several others.
> I will indeed miss LORAN C as a frequency reference for several reasons. It
> was very good more stable then wwvb on the east coast.
> And for 10 years I have had 3 austron 2100 and 2100f frequency monitors.
> I used LORAN C to set my RB standards. Granted I also have GPS using the hp
> 3801.
> So with the shutdown in Jan I hated junking the Austrons they are nice
> comparators.
> Recently, 2 days ago I set out to see if a LORAN C simulator could be
> created that was simple, effective, and inexpensive. Using very common parts
> and minimum of wiring.
> It would appear that it can be done.
>
> What I am using is 5 cmos chips CD 4000 series gates and counters and a
> parallax SXb micro programmed in basic.
> These have allowed me to emulate the master stations and the GRIs along
> with the phase reversals needed to identify a master.
> Using 2 RB standards a HP5065a as the master to the simulator and a cel
> tower RB pull and both had been set to LORAN C and checked with GPS the
> austrons tracking the simulated  LORAN signal in 1-7 E-12th range as
> expected.
>
> This is very fresh data as this has been running about 5 hours now and
> there could be issues.
> More time is needed to cleanup the software about 100 lines of easy code
> thats simple and consistent in operation. (Read this as not tricky and
> really boring)
> Other comments the waveform is simple no attempt has been made to actually
> create the wave shape. (Part of the KISS principle)
> I really wanted to see what I could get away with. Still do wonder if I
> need the phase reversals.
>
> Now if there is interest I will need to figure out how to share the details
> and code.
> Will be on a business trip for the next few days so may not see a reply.
> Regards
> Paul
>